[VOTE] Release JMeter 5.4.1 RC1

2021-01-11 Thread Milamber 

Hello,

The first release candidate for JMeter 5.4.1 (032b55e3c8) has been 
prepared, and your votes are solicited.


This release is mainly a bugfix release.

Please, test this release candidate (with load tests and/or functional 
tests) using Java 8+ on Linux/Windows/macOS, especially on the changes.

Feedback is very welcome within the next 72 hours.

You can read the New and Noteworthy section with some screenshots to 
illustrate improvements and full list of changes at:

https://apache.github.io/jmeter-site-preview/site/changes.html

JMeter is a Java desktop application designed to load test functional 
behavior and measure performance. The current version targets Java 8+


Download - Archives/hashes/sigs:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jmeter/apache-jmeter-5.4.1-rc1
(dist revision 45323)

RAT report:
https://apache.github.io/jmeter-site-preview/rat/

SHA512 hashes of archives for this vote: see footnote [1]

Site preview is here:
https://apache.github.io/jmeter-site-preview/site/

JavaDoc API preview is here:
https://apache.github.io/jmeter-site-preview/site/api/

Maven staging repository is accessible here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejmeter-1069/org/apache/jmeter/

Tag:
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=jmeter.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v5.4.1-rc1

Keys are here:
https://www.apache.org/dist/jmeter/KEYS

N.B.
To create the distribution and test JMeter: "./gradlew build -Prelease 
-PskipSign".


JMeter 5.4.1 requires Java 8 or later to run.

The artifacts were built with
  Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment Oracle Corporation (build 1.8.0_221-b11)
  Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM Oracle Corporation (build 
25.221-b11, mixed mode)


Some known issues and incompatible changes are listed on changes page.
https://apache.github.io/jmeter-site-preview/site/changes.html#Known%20problems%20and%20workarounds


All feedback and vote are welcome.

[  ] +1  I support this release
[  ] +0  I am OK with this release
[  ] -0  OK, but
[  ] -1  I do not support this release (please indicate why)

The vote will remain open for at least 72 hours.

The PMC members please indicate the mention "(binding)" with your vote.


Note: If the vote passes, the intention is to release the archive files
and rename the RC tag as the release tag.

Thanks in advance!

Milamber

===
[1] SHA512 hashes of archives for this vote:

387e3c249e2b06cfe0b1b9417a17414f79337e8d0a0baec34afd9f16c009474bcec7773686ba438dd5c7bee70183222af62d694321c2f78ff18250fa690c0061
*apache-jmeter-5.4.1.tgz
f65c14073befc60ec4c46d4734cfbb0d081a385c395db65a4f933bf6629b46bbb9617f2139eb2e2c34bd99618c6d2309eee629107d87136c41e0ebd463441eff
*apache-jmeter-5.4.1.zip
0cdd8e5024ed27ffe563eff9c393e703aa705858d11dfe6f7201a0e02cb261858fe74d4e8990ad06e87d58e8f9449fe3a31f0e2389e6121f1d5cf9bc73649950
*apache-jmeter-5.4.1_src.tgz
ed78a896af42b49a0d65b2ec860a2902552f6a27077164e73f57f18a1de1f31e8e53b967540bba6cfebd9b8d980526aca91700ceb4f9fda8b6178f819727587d
*apache-jmeter-5.4.1_src.zip

Re: Release 5.4.1

2021-01-11 Thread Felix Schumacher 



Am 11. Januar 2021 12:49:53 MEZ schrieb Milamber :
>
>I can start the release process for 5.4.1 today?

That would be awesome

 Felix 

>
>On 09/01/2021 22:04, Felix Schumacher wrote:
>> Am 09.01.21 um 17:45 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
>>> Hello Felix,
>>> My answers inline below.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 4:28 PM Felix Schumacher
>>> >> > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>  Am 09.01.21 um 15:28 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
  Hello,
  First best wishes for 2021 for all the team, I hope you're all
  doing fine !

  Second, I think we should release a 5.4.1 now.
  On my side I've been testing it for few days on Mac OSX and I
  also made some tests on Windows, my colleague did it on Linux.

  The last bug on JTree due to Darklaf
  (https://github.com/weisJ/darklaf/issues/228) was already
>there
  in 5.3 and it's not that problematic.

  WDYT ?
>>>  I would like to hear your opinion on the bugs 65053 and 65034.
>>>
>>>  Bug 65053 is about downgrading JSONPath to 2.4.0 due to a bug
>with
>>>  regex parsing. I think we could go back to 2.4.0 without
>loosing
>>>  too much.
>>>
>>> Ok by me, sounds acceptable.
>>>
>>>  Bug 65034 is about an old bug(?) in handling reading of
>>>  binarytcpclient when no EOM is set. Those requests will always
>>>  fail (at least in my tests). I think we should change the
>>>  behaviour for the case when no EOM is given to not fail on
>>>  SocketTimeoutException.
>>>
>>>
>>> I looked at your patch, it looks good to me. Thanks
>> Both committed.
>>
>> Felix
>>
>>>  Apart from that, I am in favour of releasing soon (or even now
>:) )
>>>
>>>  Felix
>>>
  Regards
  Philippe

  On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:27 PM Felix Schumacher
  >>>  > wrote:



  Am 11. Dezember 2020 12:16:09 MEZ schrieb Philippe Mouawad
  >:
  >On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:09 PM Felix Schumacher <
  >felix.schumac...@internetallee.de
  > wrote:
  >
  >>
  >>
  >> Am 11. Dezember 2020 11:45:22 MEZ schrieb Philippe
>Mouawad <
  >> philippe.moua...@gmail.com
  >:
  >> >Hello,
  >> >What is the level of UI test done after Darklaf
>upgrade ?
  >>
  >> Which level do you want to achieve?
  >>
  >> I have opened, saved an edited some simple test plans
  while working
  >on the
  >> recruiting issues. Nothing fancy. No problems seen on
  Ubuntu with
  >Darklaf
  >> (light intellij theme), that I have noticed.
  >>
  >
  >Has somebody done Windows 7 and 10 tests ?
  >This is where I saw most of the bugs.
  >I'll try to do that ,but for now I didn't find time to do
>it
  yet.

  I haven't tested yet on windows, but had planned it for
>the rc.

  >
  >I didn't yet have time to test on Mac OS.

  I don't have that os :)

  >
  >>
  >> >
  >> >Looks a bit too early for me.
  >>
  >> How long should we calculate?
  >>
  >
  >Just when we complete a minimum of tests on Mac and
>Windows,
  what do
  >you
  >think ?

  I thought, that those tests could be done on the rc, but
>if
  you want to have a bit more than the minimal testing that
>has
  been performed by the reporters of the last issues (all
  windows based I believe), then we should wait a bit more
>and
  test actively on windows.

  Give us a shout, when you feel more comfortable with the
  level of testing. I have no real pressure on this, Linux
  seems to work great ;) in the mean time I will try to test
>on
  windows, too.

  Regards
   Felix

  >
  >>
  >> Regards
  >>  Felix
  >>
  >>
  >> >
  >> >Thanks
  >> >
  >> >On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 10:58 AM Milamber
  mailto:milam...@apache.org>>
  >wrote:
  >> >
  >> >>
  >> >> I can release version 5.4.1. Now?
  >> >>
  >> >> On 10/12/2020 21:17, Felix Schumacher wrote:
  >> >> > Hi all,
  >> >> >
  >> >> > I think,

Re: Release 5.4.1

2021-01-11 Thread Philippe Mouawad 
Hello Milamber,
Ok by me.
Regards


On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 12:49 PM Milamber  wrote:

>
> I can start the release process for 5.4.1 today?
>
> On 09/01/2021 22:04, Felix Schumacher wrote:
> > Am 09.01.21 um 17:45 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
> >> Hello Felix,
> >> My answers inline below.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 4:28 PM Felix Schumacher
> >>  >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>  Am 09.01.21 um 15:28 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
> >>>  Hello,
> >>>  First best wishes for 2021 for all the team, I hope you're all
> >>>  doing fine !
> >>>
> >>>  Second, I think we should release a 5.4.1 now.
> >>>  On my side I've been testing it for few days on Mac OSX and I
> >>>  also made some tests on Windows, my colleague did it on Linux.
> >>>
> >>>  The last bug on JTree due to Darklaf
> >>>  (https://github.com/weisJ/darklaf/issues/228) was already there
> >>>  in 5.3 and it's not that problematic.
> >>>
> >>>  WDYT ?
> >>  I would like to hear your opinion on the bugs 65053 and 65034.
> >>
> >>  Bug 65053 is about downgrading JSONPath to 2.4.0 due to a bug with
> >>  regex parsing. I think we could go back to 2.4.0 without loosing
> >>  too much.
> >>
> >> Ok by me, sounds acceptable.
> >>
> >>  Bug 65034 is about an old bug(?) in handling reading of
> >>  binarytcpclient when no EOM is set. Those requests will always
> >>  fail (at least in my tests). I think we should change the
> >>  behaviour for the case when no EOM is given to not fail on
> >>  SocketTimeoutException.
> >>
> >>
> >> I looked at your patch, it looks good to me. Thanks
> > Both committed.
> >
> > Felix
> >
> >>  Apart from that, I am in favour of releasing soon (or even now :) )
> >>
> >>  Felix
> >>
> >>>  Regards
> >>>  Philippe
> >>>
> >>>  On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:27 PM Felix Schumacher
> >>>   >>>  > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  Am 11. Dezember 2020 12:16:09 MEZ schrieb Philippe Mouawad
> >>>   philippe.moua...@gmail.com>>:
> >>>  >On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:09 PM Felix Schumacher <
> >>>  >felix.schumac...@internetallee.de
> >>>  > wrote:
> >>>  >
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> Am 11. Dezember 2020 11:45:22 MEZ schrieb Philippe Mouawad
> <
> >>>  >> philippe.moua...@gmail.com
> >>>  >:
> >>>  >> >Hello,
> >>>  >> >What is the level of UI test done after Darklaf upgrade ?
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> Which level do you want to achieve?
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> I have opened, saved an edited some simple test plans
> >>>  while working
> >>>  >on the
> >>>  >> recruiting issues. Nothing fancy. No problems seen on
> >>>  Ubuntu with
> >>>  >Darklaf
> >>>  >> (light intellij theme), that I have noticed.
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >
> >>>  >Has somebody done Windows 7 and 10 tests ?
> >>>  >This is where I saw most of the bugs.
> >>>  >I'll try to do that ,but for now I didn't find time to do it
> >>>  yet.
> >>>
> >>>  I haven't tested yet on windows, but had planned it for the
> rc.
> >>>
> >>>  >
> >>>  >I didn't yet have time to test on Mac OS.
> >>>
> >>>  I don't have that os :)
> >>>
> >>>  >
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> >Looks a bit too early for me.
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> How long should we calculate?
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >
> >>>  >Just when we complete a minimum of tests on Mac and Windows,
> >>>  what do
> >>>  >you
> >>>  >think ?
> >>>
> >>>  I thought, that those tests could be done on the rc, but if
> >>>  you want to have a bit more than the minimal testing that has
> >>>  been performed by the reporters of the last issues (all
> >>>  windows based I believe), then we should wait a bit more and
> >>>  test actively on windows.
> >>>
> >>>  Give us a shout, when you feel more comfortable with the
> >>>  level of testing. I have no real pressure on this, Linux
> >>>  seems to work great ;) in the mean time I will try to test on
> >>>  windows, too.
> >>>
> >>>  Regards
> >>>   Felix
> >>>
> >>>  >
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> Regards
> >>>  >>  Felix
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> >Thanks
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> >On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 10:58 AM Milamber
> >>>  mailto:milam...@apache.org>>
> >>>  >wrote:
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> >>
> >>>  >> >> I can release version 5.4.1. Now?
> >>>  >> >>
> >>>  >> >> On

Re: Release 5.4.1

2021-01-11 Thread Milamber 


I can start the release process for 5.4.1 today?

On 09/01/2021 22:04, Felix Schumacher wrote:

Am 09.01.21 um 17:45 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:

Hello Felix,
My answers inline below.

Regards

On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 4:28 PM Felix Schumacher
mailto:felix.schumac...@internetallee.de>> wrote:


 Am 09.01.21 um 15:28 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:

 Hello,
 First best wishes for 2021 for all the team, I hope you're all
 doing fine !

 Second, I think we should release a 5.4.1 now.
 On my side I've been testing it for few days on Mac OSX and I
 also made some tests on Windows, my colleague did it on Linux.

 The last bug on JTree due to Darklaf
 (https://github.com/weisJ/darklaf/issues/228) was already there
 in 5.3 and it's not that problematic.

 WDYT ?

 I would like to hear your opinion on the bugs 65053 and 65034.

 Bug 65053 is about downgrading JSONPath to 2.4.0 due to a bug with
 regex parsing. I think we could go back to 2.4.0 without loosing
 too much.

Ok by me, sounds acceptable.

 Bug 65034 is about an old bug(?) in handling reading of
 binarytcpclient when no EOM is set. Those requests will always
 fail (at least in my tests). I think we should change the
 behaviour for the case when no EOM is given to not fail on
 SocketTimeoutException.


I looked at your patch, it looks good to me. Thanks

Both committed.

Felix


 Apart from that, I am in favour of releasing soon (or even now :) )

 Felix


 Regards
 Philippe

 On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:27 PM Felix Schumacher
 mailto:felix.schumac...@internetallee.de>> wrote:



 Am 11. Dezember 2020 12:16:09 MEZ schrieb Philippe Mouawad
 mailto:philippe.moua...@gmail.com>>:
 >On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:09 PM Felix Schumacher <
 >felix.schumac...@internetallee.de
 > wrote:
 >
 >>
 >>
 >> Am 11. Dezember 2020 11:45:22 MEZ schrieb Philippe Mouawad <
 >> philippe.moua...@gmail.com
 >:
 >> >Hello,
 >> >What is the level of UI test done after Darklaf upgrade ?
 >>
 >> Which level do you want to achieve?
 >>
 >> I have opened, saved an edited some simple test plans
 while working
 >on the
 >> recruiting issues. Nothing fancy. No problems seen on
 Ubuntu with
 >Darklaf
 >> (light intellij theme), that I have noticed.
 >>
 >
 >Has somebody done Windows 7 and 10 tests ?
 >This is where I saw most of the bugs.
 >I'll try to do that ,but for now I didn't find time to do it
 yet.

 I haven't tested yet on windows, but had planned it for the rc.

 >
 >I didn't yet have time to test on Mac OS.

 I don't have that os :)

 >
 >>
 >> >
 >> >Looks a bit too early for me.
 >>
 >> How long should we calculate?
 >>
 >
 >Just when we complete a minimum of tests on Mac and Windows,
 what do
 >you
 >think ?

 I thought, that those tests could be done on the rc, but if
 you want to have a bit more than the minimal testing that has
 been performed by the reporters of the last issues (all
 windows based I believe), then we should wait a bit more and
 test actively on windows.

 Give us a shout, when you feel more comfortable with the
 level of testing. I have no real pressure on this, Linux
 seems to work great ;) in the mean time I will try to test on
 windows, too.

 Regards
  Felix

 >
 >>
 >> Regards
 >>  Felix
 >>
 >>
 >> >
 >> >Thanks
 >> >
 >> >On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 10:58 AM Milamber
 mailto:milam...@apache.org>>
 >wrote:
 >> >
 >> >>
 >> >> I can release version 5.4.1. Now?
 >> >>
 >> >> On 10/12/2020 21:17, Felix Schumacher wrote:
 >> >> > Hi all,
 >> >> >
 >> >> > I think, we have waited long enough, to give people
 time for
 >> >feedback on
 >> >> > the last release.
 >> >> >
 >> >> > Let's do another release. Who would like to act as RM?
 >> >> >
 >> >> > Regards
 >> >> >
 >> >> >   Felix
 >> >> >
 >> >> > PS. I will test the next RC with Windows
 >> >> >
 >> >> > Am 07.12.20 um 16:06 schrieb Felix Schumacher:
 >> >> >> Am 07.12.20 um 13:58 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
 >> >> >>> Hello,
 >> >> >>> It looks like we may need to release a 5.4.1 due to
 some
 >> >regressions
 >> >> and
 >> >> >>> issues with Darklaf.
 >> >> >> Yes, it